which comes closest to meeting the needs of the veterans, with a flat 4 percent interest rate, payments spread over equal monthly installments, sound appraisal, and mortgages fully guaranteed by the Government. The entire program should be administered by the National Housing Administration. This would relieve the veterans' agency of one of its many-enough jobs. The scale of possible veteran home borrowing may be quite large and should be unified with other housing programs. Some of the educational provisions need tightening, as providing adequate protection against fly-by-night trade schools which may spring up to exploit the veteran. In some States so-called second-injury laws are proving an obstacle to the employment of disabled veterans. This should be corrected. STUDY ADDITIONAL BENEFITS The matter of additional benefits for veterans and their families could be made part of this legislative study. I know it would come as a shock to the American people to learn that we have not treated our veterans as generously as some other countries have theirs. A study comparing the GI provisions of the United States, Britain, Canada, New Zealand, South Africa, and Australia has been prepared for me and I shall send it to you. The question of including merchant seamen under veterans' benefits could be part of this legislative study. NO SUPERSALESMANSHIP One final recommendation of great importance-veterans must be protected against supersalesmanship designed to sell them everything and anything. It is most necessary that in each community the veteran be able to get proper advice in making his plans, in borrowing money and its expenditure, in deciding on education and employment. It was my hope that the all-in-one centers in the communities would fill this need. If not, it should be provided in another way. In conclusion, I extend to you my best wishes and whatever assistance I can be in the future. In many ways the success in meeting the problems of the returning veteran will be the acid test of our democracy. For we have here a matter in which there is no question of what our people would like to see done. What is at question is our competence to carry out obligations which all of us recognize and wish to see fulfilled. We must not fail the veteran-for then we fail ourselves. We fail our Nation with its heritage of greatness which is the challenge to all the world. We must show that our political and economic system which met the test of war so magnificently can be turned as effectively to the solution of human problems in the return to peace. Sincerely yours, B. M. BARUCH. Hon. W. F. GEORGE, THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF BROADCASTING, Chairman, Senate Committee on Finance, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR MR. GEORGE: The National Academy of Broadcasting, a studio of which I am director, has been accepted by the District of Columbia Board of Education as a school where veterans may be trained. Because I know the Senate Committee on Finance is anxious to learn the truth about the practical application of the original bill now in the process of being amended, I submit a concrete case for your consideration. Here is the story of the experience I have had, showing that either the original law or its local interpretation makes training of veterans financially impossible. The National Academy of Broadcasting, a studio school in Washington, D. C., which teaches broadcasting technique, this past year had many applications from veterans who claimed that they could choose the field of study they desired and have the tuition paid for by the United States Government. The school accordingly brought the matter up before the local board of education and secured the approval required after two delegations representing the board had investigated the training given. Letters from all over the United States of America were sent in showing the types of positions graduates had obtained. The school registered the amount of its usual fees with the Veterans' Adminis tration and everything seemed to be "all set" for the educational rehabilitation of those veterans who wanted to get into the field of broadcasting. A statement of the amount of tuition to be paid was sent in for one veteran who had been advised by the local office that he could study at this particular school. To prepare himself through concentrated study for a position as announcer, he was to study: Announcing (30 hours), radio drama (20 hours), speech and diction (12 private lessons), music continuity writing (10 hours), and foreign language pronunciation (10 hours). The school was then requested to fill out a form telling exactly how much the veteran would have had to pay if he had studied for 34 weeks and how many semester hours he was taking, also how many hours he was in attendance each week. (See sample of form enclosed.) Although the questions were not applicable to the type of school where courses were given in 10-hour terms and much of the work done in private lessons or small groups, the questionnaire was answered on the basis of an estimate. Then the jolt came. According to the law it seems that each student was supposed to be in actual attendance in class rooms for 25 hours each week in order to get the $500 promise—which, was also to cover incidentals, such as books, supplies, laboratory fees, etc. Now it happens that professional schools and colleges for adults usually require 15 or 16 hours of class-room attendance with a corresponding number of credits given. Twenty-five hours a week is not even allowed in a reputable school. Only schools on a grade-school level or schools where practice in mechanical skills is necessary or extensive laboratory work is required demand longer hours. So you see, when tuition is prorated on the basis of the impossible figure of 25 hours a week (a total of 850 hours), the $500 is almost cut in two. In the case of the veteran in question who took up the various courses in broadcasting technique under skilled teachers and in professional studiosthe actual amount allowed by law for books, recording, and instruction was only $52.94. Since books were $12.50 and recording $25, the school actually is to receive only $15.44—and this, mind you, for 12 private lessons, plus 20 hours of instruction in radio drama in a professional studio, 30 hours announcing, 10 hours foreign language pronunciation, and 10 hours of music continuity writing. To cap the climax, the studio was requested to fill out a voucher stating the exact number of months studied and the charge per month. It turns out that the veteran in question received instruction over a period of 2.4 months and that the amount allowed per month is $6.433 for services rendered (the cost for books and recordings having been $37.50). When we use a little higher mathematics we discover the school is being paid at the unique rate of 16% cents an hour. (As yet the school has received no compensation whatsoever from the Government.) Most of us have seen the moving pictures in which returned veterans are seen studying violin, aviation, etc. The questions comes to mind: "What school is able to teach music or aviation or photography or any one of several specialized subjects at 16% cents an hour?" Obviously, the Senate and the House will have to amend the law if it is to mean anything. Boys-like the veteran just described-who have given 4 years out of their lives and have been wounded and hospitalized, possibly, as he was, are going to demand that the promise of education given them is not a hoax. Most private schools, I am told, have given up trying to operate at a loss. They see how impossible it is to accept $15.44 for something that actually costs them nearly $100. Several veterans who have studied at this same studio have said, "Bother the red tape. I'll pay my own tuition." Here are some questions to ponder: Should the bill have been drafted by educators instead of lawyers? Is the veteran actually supposed to say, "Oh, bother the red tape," and then pay his own tuition or else go without the training promised, or is the bill intended primarily to apply to secondary and trade schools rather than professional schools? Even then can any school accept 16% cents an hour? The veteran under discussion has a rewarding position as announcer and newscaster on a local station and he can pay for his educational training, but what will the reaction be when other boys returning find out the real situation? In my opinion, the proposed amendment should take care of full payment for short intensive professional courses which prepare veterans for jobs in record time, and it should also call for a simplification of method in handling educational problems. Frankly, secretarial work involved in this one case discussed cost well over $20. I have had to fill out forms that do not apply to the situation-spending long hours myself. Two forms are enclosed. The standard Form No. 1034a, which reduces the veteran to an item and asks for the cost per month at the ludicrous rate of 16% cents an hour, is more or less absurd when viewed objectively. If my presence at a hearing would be in any way helpful, I should be glad to DEAR MR. MACCAMMON: Mr. Cox is now studying at the National Academy of Broadcasting. Below is a statement covering his tuition, and cost of books and recordings: Private lessons, 1 hour each (12 hours) General broadcasting, 4 hours per week (30-hour course) $40.00 45.00 Foreign language pronunciation, 1 hour per week (10-hour course) 15.00 15.00 Drama, 2 hours per week (20 hour course) __ 25.00 N. B. Certainly these fees are not exorbitant and by no stretch of the imagination could $15.44 be called adequate compensation for services rendered. ALICE KETTH. Senator JOHNSON. We will start in the morning at 10 o'clock. (The committee adjourned at 4 p. m.) AMENDMENTS TO THE SERVICEMEN'S READJUSTMENT ACT OF 1944 THURSDAY, OCTOBER 11, 1945 UNITED STATES SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE ON VETERANS' LEGISLATION OF THE COMMITTEE ON FINANCE, Washington, D. C. The subcommittee met at 10 a. m., pursuant to adjournment, in room 312, Senate Office Building, Senator Edwin C. Johnson (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. Present: Senators Johnson (chairman of the subcommittee), Lucas, and Millikin. Senator JOHNSON. The subcommittee will be in order. Mr. Ketchum representing Veterans of Foreign Wars. STATEMENT OF OMAR B. KETCHUM, NATIONAL LEGISLATIVE REPRESENTATIVE, VETERANS OF FOREIGN WARS OF THE UNITED STATES Mr. KETCHUM. Mr. Chairman, and members of the committee, the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States, composed of more than 1,000,000 men who have served on foreign soil or in hostile waters during America's wars, campaigns, and expeditions, including some 700,000 men of World War II, is one of the oldest veteran organizations in the United States. It has just concluded its forty-sixth annual national convention in Chicago, Ill., where the officers and delegates adopted some very pertinent resolutions on changes believed to be necessary to the satisfactory and successful operation of Public Law 346, Seventy-eighth Congress, the Servicemen's Readjustment Act of 1944, and often referred to as the GI bill of rights. Inasmuch as the Veterans of Foreign Wars played an important part in sponsoring this act in the Seventy-eighth Congress, it believes it has the right to criticize weaknesses and recommend changes. As the duly authorized spokesman for the Veterans of Foreign Wars, I appreciate the courtesy and opportunity to appear before this committee and offer the suggested changes which our organization has approved and which are based upon complaints received from eligible veterans by our service officers, posts, departments, and national headquarters, 1 H. R. 3749, S. 742, S. 866, S. 487, S. 781, S. 826, S. 850, S. 974, S. 1031, S. 1324, S. 738, S, 795, S. 1202, S. 291, and S. 1176. 219 77877-45- -15 |